Mikhail and Hodj's Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
2,199
1
Public broadcasting seems to be pretty decent
According to YOU.

and I'm sure they must submit lengthy reports to get funding for certain projects.
And if projects which some people might consider worthy get turned down to meet someone else's (possibly asinine) notion of decency? What then? That's a loss everyone else has to eat in order to protect some totally subjective notion about what kinds of information are acceptable to make available because the people who hold those notions just say so (without further justification). That is not an argument.
 

TheBeagle

JunkiesNetwork Donor
9,138
32,063
Public broadcasting seems to be pretty decent and I'm sure they must submit lengthy reports to get funding for certain projects.
So privately funded media should be regulated just like publicly funded television. Awesome.

So in your world, what would be the appropriate fine to be levied against a morning news show airing Miley Cyrus footage?
 

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
So privately funded media should be regulated just like publicly funded television. Awesome.

So in your world, what would be the appropriate fine to be levied against a morning news show airing Miley Cyrus footage?
A percentage of ad revenue for that specific news show.
 

TheBeagle

JunkiesNetwork Donor
9,138
32,063
Answer the question.
Ok fine. No i don't want NBC airing hardcore porn at 8.

Do you want some republican appointed chairman of the FCC banning the Teletubbies from TV because some religious idiots think they are promoting a gay lifestyle?
 

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,117
172,339
Ok fine. No i don't want NBC airing hardcore porn at 8.

Do you want some republican appointed chairman of the FCC banning the Teletubbies from TV because some religious idiots think they are promoting a gay lifestyle?
Well, there you go. You decided what is socially acceptable and what isnt it because of its offensive nature. And I am sure the community at large would agree with you.

Would the community at large find teletubbies offensive? Probably not.


I dont understand why you guys think this is an either/or proposition. I dont understand why you guys think that if we can't have total moral anarchy on the airwaves, then it will be total Nazi censorship.

There is a middle ground to be had here where we dont show offensive or sexual content at a time when kids could be watching TV. That's what decency laws are about.
 

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Mik, when was the last time you were happy?

I think you should get together with Dumar. The Two of you could commit suicide together to escape this horrible society.
 

TheBeagle

JunkiesNetwork Donor
9,138
32,063
A percentage of ad revenue for that specific news show.
Ok, so they get fined if Miley is fully clothed but just suggestively posing?

Do they get fined if its Scarlett Johanesbergenstein instead?

What if its Scarlett in a nonsuggestive pose, but shes wearing a skirt that's too short or has too much cleavage?

Who's gonna delineate exactly who is allowed on morning news shows and how much clothes exactly they can wear?

Who's gonna pay for all the extra levels of bureaucracy to monitor our airwaves to keep our children safe?

It seems to me you are making it way more complicated than it really is. If you really don't like it, then turn it off.
 
2,199
1
I dont understand why you guys think this is an either/or proposition. I dont understand why you guys think that if we can't have total moral anarchy on the airwaves, then it will be total Nazi censorship.
Because I think the absence of what you call moral anarchy is the imposition of wholly subjective values. Just because 90% of people don't want to hear it doesn't mean that the other 10% shouldn't be allowed to say it. That's an extremely dangerous precedent.
 

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,117
172,339
Mik, when was the last time you were happy?

I think you should get together with Dumar. The Two of you could commit suicide together to escape this horrible society.
They would probably just kiss a lot, having finally found their true soulmate in each other
 

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Well, there you go. You decided what is socially acceptable and what isnt it because of its offensive nature. And I am sure the community at large would agree with you.

Would the community at large find teletubbies offensive? Probably not.


I dont understand why you guys think this is an either/or proposition. I dont understand why you guys think that if we can't have total moral anarchy on the airwaves, then it will be total Nazi censorship.

There is a middle ground to be had here where we dont show offensive or sexual content at a time when kids could be watching TV. That's what decency laws are about.
Because they are extremists.
 

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA
<Banned>
25,295
48,789
Ok, so they get fined if Miley is fully clothed but just suggestively posing?

Do they get fined if its Scarlett Johanesbergenstein instead?

What if its Scarlett in a nonsuggestive pose, but shes wearing a skirt that's too short or has too much cleavage?

Who's gonna delineate exactly who is allowed on morning news shows and how much clothes exactly they can wear?

Who's gonna pay for all the extra levels of bureaucracy to monitor our airwaves to keep our children safe?

It seems to me you are making it way more complicated than it really is. If you really don't like it, then turn it off.
Companies would hire individuals to calculate out to the cent the cost versus gain of airing anything lime that.

Don't try to equate pancake ass to nice boobs. But seriously, you would have to with a system like that.
 
2,199
1
They would probably just kiss a lot, having finally found their true soulmate in each other
No way, bro. These guys told me that's bad and the society I live in is completely dominated by their asinine viewpoint:

stjohn2006.gif


Look at that hat. There's no arguing with that hat.
 

Loser Araysar

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
85,117
172,339
Because I think the absence of what you call moral anarchy is the imposition of wholly subjective values. Just because 90% of people don't want to hear it doesn't mean that the other 10% shouldn't be allowed to say it. That's an extremely dangerous precedent.
If 90% dont want to hear it in a publicly shared common space, I dont see how its even more right that they should be subjected to the whims of the 10%.

The 10% have their space. Let's roll back to gays, for a moment here. Gays have their newspapers, websites, books, plays, films, etc. They have their communities, their events, etc.

Is anyone keeping them from doing any of that stuff? No. But when they enter a publicly shared common space where the vast majority of the population is not like them, they should respect the wishes of the majority, rather than expect the majority to be subservient to their whims and their demands.

Is it wrong to make gay porn? No. Is it wrong to show gay porn on NBC at prime time? Yes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.